They were refusing to share them with anyone reputable until today. Today, they said they would share them, so hopefully this will all be over soon (but IMO it's already resolved).
> They were refusing to share them with anyone reputable until today.
This is incorrect (under some definition of "reputable"), because KENTECH [1] has reportedly received samples from Q-Center for the analysis, which started on July (following the MOU on May) and is estimated to finish within 6 months. Whether KENTECH is reputable or not, and whether it should be considered affiliated with Q-Center is of course debatable.
I don't consider a replication attempt with a lab in a commercial relationship with another lab, that has essentially embargoed the results for six months, credible.
Of course, but you don't waste your lab time with useless samples. KENTECH must have seen something to actually allocate resources for the analysis. The recent interview with the vice president of KENTECH said that the initial request was in 2017, when samples were not really reproducible and too impure for analysis, but it was only this year when samples are good enough and can be actually analyzed---if it's just a fake they could have done so in 2017 instead.
